Saving democracy by curtailing it?

Aznar and Blair take radically different approaches to the "political wings" of terrorism, writes Paddy Woodworth.

Aznar and Blair take radically different approaches to the "political wings" of terrorism, writes Paddy Woodworth.

Last weekend, for the first time since democracy returned to Spain 25 years ago, Basque town councils were set up without any representation for Batasuna, the radical party accused by the government and courts of being an integral part of the terrorist group ETA. Batasuna previously held the mayorships in 43 councils, and had a significant presence in most of the others.

Batasuna is absent from these councils because the government and courts have, over the last year, simply banned the party from participation in the political process. But its core supporters have not gone away. In the local elections of May 25th, up to 140,000 of them spoiled their votes in protest at their exclusion. In a few towns spoiled votes exceeded all others cast.

The banning of any political party is a step most democrats would balk at, most of the time. It is certainly the inverse of the British government's policy of political engagement with Sinn Féin and the parties linked to the loyalist paramilitaries.

READ MORE

But the strategy of banning Batasuna has gained remarkably wide acceptance among Spanish democrats of both the governing centre-right Partido Popular (PP) and the main opposition centre-left Socialist Party (PSOE).

Since the 9/11 attacks in the US, Aznar has skilfully persuaded Western international opinion to support his arguments. The US State Department and the EU have now categorised Batasuna as a "terrorist group". (Where this leaves the party's sole MEP remains to be seen.)

In the Basque Country itself, however, the move has widened the already gaping chasm between Basque nationalists of all varieties and the PP and PSOE. Nationalist Basques who have no association with violence feel their aspirations are under assault from resurgent Spanish nationalism. Madrid rejects the charge, countering that Basque nationalism is indeed a core part of the problem, since its leaders continue to be complacent about, or even complicit with, ETA's terrorism.

The Spanish Prime Minister, Mr José María Aznar, has always firmly resisted calls to emulate the British-Irish peace process, even during the group's 1998-99 ceasefire. When ETA returned to violence, Aznar sought cross-party support for a radical new departure. Terrorism should now be fought, he argued, "only within the law, but with the full force of the law".

The phrase "only within the law" harks back to PSOE administrations, which permitted the security forces to conduct a so-called "dirty war" against ETA. Aznar has certainly kept the security forces under tighter control since he won the 1996 elections, though convincing allegations of human rights abuses still surface.

The reference to the "full force of the law" reflects Aznar's iron determination to abolish the "areas of impunity" which he claims ETA and its supporters had previously enjoyed, particularly where they fell under the jurisdiction to the Basque autonomous government. This administration is dominated by the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV), a democratic party which abhors ETA's violent methods but shares some, at least, of its aims.

The context for Madrid's new hard line was itself created by a hard-line strategy espoused in the 1990s by ETA. In the strictly "military" field, this involved killing vulnerable Basque local councillors from both the PP and PSOE. Academics, journalists and legal figures were also targeted, so that Basques critical of nationalism felt they were living under a state of siege.

The PNV government, with a well-equipped regional police force, often seemed either incapable or unwilling to halt this wave of terror.

Aznar's strategists took the view that ETA, Batasuna (then Herri Batasuna) and several associated groups were all part of a single terrorist organisation. Differentiation between political and terrorist activists, they argued, served ETA's interests, not democracy's. The PSOE, seeing its own councillors gunned down ruthlessly by ETA, felt it had little choice but to go along, though some members expressed doubts, usually in private, about its democratic ethics and political wisdom.

Fears were expressed, however, that if political routes were blocked, then political activists would opt for violence, and the conflict would become even more intractable.

On the surface, this does not seem to have happened so far. Instead, the response has been mostly limited to large demonstrations. The local elections passed off quietly enough. There were angry scenes at some council meetings last weekend, and a few councils could not meet in their own towns, but there was no indication that Basque society is closer to civil conflict than it has been for the last 10 years. ETA, operationally spancelled by the Spanish and French police, is going through one of its weakest phases despite its killing of two policemen after the elections .

It is still, however, much too early to say whether Aznar's strategy will be successful. There are periodic indications that the opposition PSOE, whose support has been crucial to Aznar's success in this field so far, may be shifting to a less rigidly anti-nationalist line.

Meanwhile, the nationalist-dominated Basque government is currently locked in a confrontation with the Supreme Court over its refusal to execute a ruling dissolving Batasuna's parliamentary group. One of Aznar's deputy prime ministers has described the stand-off as "the most serious constitutional crisis since the advent of democracy".

There is speculation, firmly denied in Madrid, that Aznar plans to suspend Basque autonomous institutions in response to this crisis.

Above all, however, there is concern that the law is being used as a blunt political instrument, to close newspapers, for example, or arrest Batasuna leaders, when hard evidence of terrorist collaboration is lacking. There are fears that the line separating powers between judiciary and government is being dangerously blurred.

Considered criticism of government strategy is too often dismissed by the bullying retort that "either you are with us or you are with ETA". And also a widespread sense that all debate on the Basque question is now reduced to what the Spanish call pensamiento único, the "single permissible discourse", involving demonising Basque nationalism along with terrorism.

All this is a high price to pay for the new strategy in democratic terms. The dilemma for democrats, of course, is that the terrorists set their price in human lives.